Quote:
Originally Posted by skcin
^That's what gets me. They keep telling us all these bridges are in need of repair, but then they decide it's too expensive, so they just patch them up a bit & hope they last. I mean, really, is this something we should be stingy about?  They're perfectly happy to spend all kinds of money elsewhere. It's like if I needed a new roof on my house & decided it was too costly, but renovated my kitchen. It makes no sense to me. |
I was watching news about this on tv last night, and they said something about needed 9/5 millions dollars per year for hte next 20 years to get all of the bridges 'back into shape', but they only have 2 million budgeted for it.
Then they were asking , if this MN bridge has been inspected and was deemed structurally deficient, why was it still in use? The response was something about 'it needed some work, but was sound enough to work for the remaining life of the bridge'. WTF? 'the remaining life of the bridge'? Guess what they meant was 'we'll just take our chances until it doesn't work anymore.'